Description: This paper was awarded a Nicholas and Anna Ricco Ethics Award for 2013. In this paper, the author discusses issues related to accountability versus autonomy and suggestions toward a more responsible practice of science.

Description: In this paper, the author discusses whether open access threatens peer review, as implied by the Association of American Publishers in their endorsement of the Research Works Act. The author suggests that we need to experiment with new models of peer evaluation.

Description: This paper discusses the University of North Texas' (UNT) Center for the Study of Interdisciplinarity (CSID), where philosophers continue to examine the value of knowledge. The authors also discuss one example of CSID's work with the Comparative Assessment of Peer Review (CAPR) project. CAPR is a four-year project (2008-2012) studying the changing nature of peer review processes across six U.S. and foreign public science agencies. CAPR is funded by the U.S. National Science Foundation's (NSF) Science of Science and Innovation Policy (SciSIP) program.